Thread: Non-Compete Clause in Contract's

Don't know who wrote you handbook language GrassM. but in my opinion the non solicitation would not be enforceable because, among other things, there is no time duration , thus it would be deemed too broad in scope., therefore unreasonable and unenforceable

How so? If you worked for us, and went after our customers, your in the wrong. This is easy to prove with route sheets and signatures of who ran what route. By an employee signing a route sheet, it is a legal binding document.

How so? If you worked for us, and went after our customers, your in the wrong. This is easy to prove with route sheets and signatures of who ran what route. By an employee signing a route sheet, it is a legal binding document.

I don't want to argue with you GrassM, below is language from a court of appeals decision in NC discussing this very issue. Do what you want:

" The remaining non-solicitation clause includes no time restriction. A plain reading of the non-solicitation agreement would permit MJM to prohibit Defendants from soliciting "current or prospect clients" indefinitely. A non-solicitation clause without any time restriction is clearly too broad and, therefore, unenforceable, no matter the scope of the territorial limitation. Id. at 315, 450 S.E.2d at 918 ("The North Carolina Supreme Court has stated that only 'extreme conditions' will support a five-year covenant: 'It may be held that in some instances and under extreme conditions five years would be held to not be unreasonable.' Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Pankow, 268 N.C. 137, 139, 150 S.E.2d 56, 58 (1966)(emphasis added).").

For the reasons stated above, we hold the non-solicitation agreement is unenforceable against Defendants. The trial court erred in granting MJM a preliminary injunction based upon this agreement. We reverse and remand to the trial court for further action consistent with this opinion."

I don't want to argue with you GrassM, below is language from a court of appeals decision in NC discussing this very issue. Do what you want:

" The remaining non-solicitation clause includes no time restriction. A plain reading of the non-solicitation agreement would permit MJM to prohibit Defendants from soliciting "current or prospect clients" indefinitely. A non-solicitation clause without any time restriction is clearly too broad and, therefore, unenforceable, no matter the scope of the territorial limitation. Id. at 315, 450 S.E.2d at 918 ("The North Carolina Supreme Court has stated that only 'extreme conditions' will support a five-year covenant: 'It may be held that in some instances and under extreme conditions five years would be held to not be unreasonable.' Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Pankow, 268 N.C. 137, 139, 150 S.E.2d 56, 58 (1966)(emphasis added).").

For the reasons stated above, we hold the non-solicitation agreement is unenforceable against Defendants. The trial court erred in granting MJM a preliminary injunction based upon this agreement. We reverse and remand to the trial court for further action consistent with this opinion."